Yardley and Yardley
Case
•
[2007] FamCA 64
•13 February 2007
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Yardley and Yardley [2007] FamCA 64
[2007] FamCA 64
13 February 2007
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In *Yardley and Yardley*, Young J of the Family Court of Australia was required to make final orders concerning the property settlement between a husband and wife. The proceedings involved an application to vary or set aside previous consent orders made on 27 April 2005, pursuant to s 79A(1) of the *Family Law Act 1975*.
The court was tasked with determining the appropriate division of the parties' assets and liabilities, including a specific sum to be paid by the husband to the wife. The court also needed to establish the consequences of the husband's default in making this payment, particularly concerning the sale of real property.
Young J ordered that the husband pay the wife $22,500 within sixty days. In the event of default, the husband was to sell the real property, with the wife to receive the payment along with penalty interest from the date of the orders. The court also ordered that each party retain their remaining assets, chattels, investments, and superannuation, and that each party bear their own legal costs. Liberty to apply was reserved solely in relation to the terms and conditions of any sale in default. The orders were made by consent, with both parties agreeing to the variation of the previous consent orders.
The court was tasked with determining the appropriate division of the parties' assets and liabilities, including a specific sum to be paid by the husband to the wife. The court also needed to establish the consequences of the husband's default in making this payment, particularly concerning the sale of real property.
Young J ordered that the husband pay the wife $22,500 within sixty days. In the event of default, the husband was to sell the real property, with the wife to receive the payment along with penalty interest from the date of the orders. The court also ordered that each party retain their remaining assets, chattels, investments, and superannuation, and that each party bear their own legal costs. Liberty to apply was reserved solely in relation to the terms and conditions of any sale in default. The orders were made by consent, with both parties agreeing to the variation of the previous consent orders.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Family Law
-
Equity & Trusts
Legal Concepts
-
Consent
-
Costs
-
Injunction
-
Remedies
-
Res Judicata
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Yardley and Yardley [2007] FamCA 64
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1